Allowed

St.Mary'S Oil Industries v. K.N.Syed Mohammed

Kerala HC9 Aug 2007Crl.Rev.Pet/1750/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala disposed of criminal revision petition challenging conviction under Section 138 NI Act. Parties settled under Section 147 CrPC; composition recorded with effect of acquittal under Section 320(8) CrPC. Appeal dismissed by settlement.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence quashed; money deposited refunded; composition recorded; revision petition disposed of as settled.

St.Mary'S Oil Industries Vs K.N.Syed Mohammed — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 9TH AUGUST 2007 / 18TH SRAVANA 1929

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1750 of 2007()

¶6

-----------------------------CRA.124/2006 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA CC.348/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHERTHALA

¶7

REVN. PETITIONER: APPELLANT/ACCUSED

¶8

¶9

ST.MARY'S OIL INDUSTRIES, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AROOR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER.

¶10

JOSEPH VARGHESE @ JOSEY, PATTARA VEEDU, S.N.PURAM P.O., CHERTHALA.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.K.G.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR

¶12

RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶13

¶14

K.N.SYED MUHAMMED, KALLARACKAL VEEDU, CHERTHALA- REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER R.PAVITHRAN, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, ELANGATTUVELI, C.W.C.27, CHERTHALA.

¶15

STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶16

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR SMT.T.K.SREEKALA

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶19

Crl. R.P. No. 1750 OF 2007 C ````````````````````````````````````````````````````

¶20

Dated this the 9^th day of August, 2007

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The revision petitioners, who were the accused in C.C.No.348/2003 on the file of the JFCM-I, Cherthala for an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against them concurrently by the trial court for the said offence.

¶23

Pending this revision, the parties have settled the matter and have filed Crl.M.A.No.8549/2007 under section 147 of the Act for recording the composition entered into by them. The said petition has been signed by both the revision petitioners as well as the complainant and their respective counsels. The composition is recorded and it will have the effect of an acquittal within the meaning of section 320(8) Cr.P.C. Money, if any, paid by the revision petitioners pursuant to orders, if any, passed by the lower appellate court shall be refunded to the revision petitioners. The sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) deposited pursuant to orders passed by the lower appellate court shall be withdrawn by the 1^st respondent complainant.

¶24

This revision petition is disposed of as above.

¶25

(V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE)

¶26

aks

St.Mary'S Oil Industries v. K.N.Syed Mohammed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

St.Mary'S Oil Industries v. K.N.Syed Mohammed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Francis C.T. Vs Thomas

Binu Vs Pushpa

Sukumari Amma Vs K.S.Ramesh Babu

Hamsa Vs State of Kerala

Asokan Vs Inspector of Police,Cbi/Scb,Chennai

Kavil Sasidharan Vs P.G. Issac & Another